This paper attempts to sketch an initial and very provisional account of a workable notion of historical literacy. It draws briefly on some philosophical considerations suggested by ¾ among others ¾ the work of Bevir, Collingwood, Lorenz, Oakeshott and Rüsen in order to decide what might be usefully included in such a notion. More substantially, it employs recent empirical research to suggest what an account of historical literacy might need to address. At the very least any useful account ought to pay attention to two components: first, students' ideas about the discipline of history; second, their orientation towards the past (the kind of past they can access, and its relationship to the present and future). Research connecting these two components of historical literacy has only recently begun, although Rüsen's theoretical approach to historical consciousness has inspired investigation of the second component for some time in parts of Europe. It is argued that a major project for history education must be the development of usable historical frameworks of the past that are not 'party histories', but allow students to assimilate new events and processes, whether in the past or the future, and are themselves adaptable in the face of recalcitrant new material. Key tools here will be adequately sophisticated ideas about historical accounts, together with closely related concepts such as significance, interpretation and change.
Historical education; Orientation; Framework; Second-order; concept; History understanding